The most humane hunting is provided when a deer or other animal can be captured as soon as possible after being wounded. If the animal can escape and not be found, then it can be in pain for great lengths of time in accordance with how it was hit. Hunting arrows now in standard use cause almost no blood track to be left for a hunter to follow for trailing a deer because the arrow shaft tends to plug up the opening made by the arrow.
The blood of a deer coagulates many, many times faster than that of a human being.
In years past there have been various proposals for the making of arrows capable of conducting blood from the inside of an animal to the outside so that the blood leaves a trail to be found by the hunter. None are on the market to my knowledge and this, in my opinion is due to various disadvantages in their construction.
Deer hunting with arrows is both a good sport and a way to bring meat to the table, but it is best if it can be done as humanely as possible.
Arrows of the prior art are intended for the escape of blood from an animal have had holes extending into the interior of tubular shafts, but the holes have been drilled at a right angle to the shafts. This tends to increase the possibility that the flesh of the animal may become crowded into the hole, stopping flow. Another disadvantage is noise.
Deer have acutely sensitive hearing and they can hear an arrow flying through the air and are much more likely to become alarmed if there is a whistling sound caused by holes in the shaft that extend at a right angle to the shaft.
To solve these two problems, I have conceived that in both cases, the problem is that the hole is at a right angle to the shaft, solvable by drilling the hole at a slant with the holes slanting to the rearward toward its outer end. This would make a arrow that would be more quiet and with less whistling to alarm a deer and, also, an arrow with holes less likely to be clogged with flesh.
Another disadvantage of arrows proposed for this purpose has been the absence of a hole or holes in a mid-section of the shaft. This may have been from the thought that the head of the shaft and a substantial part of the shaft might enter the deer, whereas the rearward end might not, so that blood entering at the head would escape out the rearward end of the shaft. But, in my opinion, more of the arrows are stopping in the deer in such a way that both the forward end and the rearward end of the arrow are outside the deer on opposite sides of the deer. When this happens, there is no blood flow through the arrow. Believing this to be a problem, I conceived of an arrow having holes near the ends of the arrow, but also one or more holes therebetween so that when an arrow is protruding from the deer, both at its head, and at its tail, the blood can flow through the hole at the center of the shaft and then spurt out each end of the shaft. This also increases the speed of blood loss which is desirable for humane recovery of the animal quickly without unnecessary pain and leaves an easier trail to follow.